Hotfile Lost to MPAA in Piracy BattleAdded: Saturday, September 14th, 2013
Category: Recent Headlines Involving File Sharing > Ridiculous Criminal Trials
Tags:ET, p2p, Torrent, Piracy, Peer To Peer, Network, Hackers, Internet, BitTorrent, Google, utorrent, bitcomet, extratorrent, www.extrattorrent.com, 2013
The Motion Picture Association of America has scored a significant victory against the file-hosting service Hotfile. The District Court of Florida ruled that Hotfile failed to control the distribution of pirated films via its service. The anti-piracy outfit was happy to hear the verdict and claimed that Hotfile’s business model was built on mass distribution of stolen works.
Once in the top 10 file-sharing websites, Hotfile has recently become a prime target for Hollywood. More than two years ago the MPAA filed a lawsuit against the website, and since then the court battle was watched by industry observers. Moreover, Hotfile even sued MPAA member Warner Bros. right back for allegedly abusing its copyright takedown tools.
The movie industry hoped to avoid a trial and asked for a summary judgment on the alleged copyright violations committed by the file-sharing service. In response, Hotfile insisted that it is just a service provider and wants a jury to decide the outcome of the case. In result, Florida District Court Judge has decided in favor of the industry. Although the verdict has yet to be released in public, the outfit has already claimed its victory, revealing that the court noted that the file-sharing service was successful in large part because it failed to control infringement activity on its system. The judge most likely found Hotfile responsible for secondary copyright violation, or a related charge.
The movie studios insist that Hotfile’s entire business revolved around piracy. The MPAA boss described the court ruling as “a victory for all of people who work hard to create the movies and TV shows. However, Hotfile has always contested the characterization of being a “pirate haven”. In addition, the service previously pointed out to the judge that it had been following the DMCA. In the meantime, Hotfile demonstrated that the most downloaded files were not pirated films but Open Source software. Finally, the service argued that affiliate programs are essential for compensating content creators for their works. However, in the end the District Court sided with the Motion Picture Association of America and issued a summary judgment.
Considering the time and effort Hotfile has spent in the legal battle thus far, the experts believe it is going to file an appeal.
Thanks to TorrentFreak for providing the source of the article
September 14th,2013Posted by:
Saturday, September 14th, 2013
|posted by (2013-09-15 00:54:06)|
|I just dont understand how a court can rule against this kind of thing any more. We all know that as soon as one of thease sites is taken down or ruled against that another ten pop up in its place.|
The industry better get its stats strait, that we are their audience now, beacause evrything is either so damn expensive or aired in another country up to a year before coming to ours.
I have to admit that thease sites all sound alike and that i hadnt even heard of Hotfile until today.
They have to concede that they either have to find another way to monatise mass media or just deal with the fact that a great number of us just cant afford to stay in the loop any other way. xx
|posted by (2013-09-15 00:58:41)|
|PS Thanks again Sam for your work on this news feature, its really been helpfull and inforative, keep up the good work.|
ET Is the place to be!! Thanks
|posted by (2013-09-15 15:49:11)|
|Another idiotic ruling showing how badly the US copyright laws are written. First, a file sharing site is no more than a site that is content-neutral, i.e., it can be used for legal purposes or illegal purposes. Just like a copying machine can be used to copy copyrighted works or non-copyrighted works. Who would ever suggest that Xerox should be liable for infringement because someone used its copier to copy and distribute a book. Second, DMCA provides a "safe harbor" provision, which is supposed to give websites the opportunity to remove copyrighted material when notified of it by a copyright holder. For a file-sharing site, this is especially critical, because they should not have to monitor ever file that is ever uploaded or downloaded, research whether there is a copyright, and then remove it -- that burden is properly placed on the copyright holder, who has the incentive to police it's copyright. Finally, although it is legal, it is too bad that we allow industry trade groups to have standing to sue on behalf of individual members of the group. The copyrightholders should be forced to sue on their on behalf, and not simply have a trade group do the dirty work with the cumulative funds of the entire industry.|
This concludes my rant for now . . .
|the government will never admit the the public have out smarted them with piracy|
|And this is what NETFLIX is doing. found it on IMDB|
Netflix Watches Piracy Sites to Picks Its Flicks
Well, this is kind of obvious but interesting to hear spoken by an actual Netflix employee: Netflix monitors piracy to figure out what's popular. "When purchasing series, we look at what does well on piracy sites," says Kelly Merryman, VP of content acquisition. Netflix CEO Reed Hastings recently said Netflix's availability in Canada contributed to a dip in piracy nationwide; that claim's been disputed. Hastings still has the ol' "Netflix is so much easier than [using BitTorrent] ... you don’t have to deal with files, you don’t have to download them and move them around. You just click and watch" on his side, though. »
- Zach Dionne
See full article at Vulture »
Report a problem
|How mush money they're paying the judge |
I believe there's should be a fair jury trail.
|@numbnut, That's the whole issue, the law don't see|
file sharing sites is no more than a site that is
content-neutral. I agree with you on the copying
machine can be used to copy copyrighted works, included
printers. Now they trying to stop the new 3D printers.
Think I should buy a 3D printer soon
|posted by (2013-09-16 10:40:40)|
|MPAA and a likes should be sued every time they claim theft. Clearly they don't even know the difference between stealing and making a duplicate but they keep on claiming theft again and again where there is none.|
|Attacking piracy makes no real sense.. Piracy effects are hardly noticed in my case..|
For example, I don't have time or money to go and see movies.
so if I couldn't get them on the net for free, I just would never watch them..
No effect to them, because they lose zero dollars in my case. I'm sure other people are like me in that way too.
Companies are just money hungry, greedy machines, and the people who run them are the worst.
|wow hot file down :p ..|
|Wow you all make pretty good stand points here's my point they claim theft on who's behalf if I was to see you in person and give you a movie that I bought is that stealing? On who's behalf? I don't see how it's theft when it's all free I'd give you one of my crappy movies for one of your crappy movies....if it's good I'd buy it and then take it to the pawnshop isnt that considered redustribution? ( down there at the pawnshop ) rip Bradley nowell||
Most Popular Stories